Community-Driven Violence Reduction Programs: Examining Pittsburgh's One Vision One Life

• NCJ Number: 236969
• Journal: Criminology & Public Policy Volume: 10 Issue: 4 Dated: November 2011 Pages: 993-1027
• Author(s): Jeremy M. Wilson; Steven Chermak
• Date Published: November 2011
• Length: 35 pages
• Grant Number(s): 2006-IJ-CX-0030
• Agencies: NIJ-Sponsored
• Publication Type: Research (Applied/Empirical)

Annotation

This study examined community-driven violence reduction program, One Vision that was instituted in Pittsburgh, PA.

Abstract

The study found that Pittsburgh, PA's community-driven violence reduction program, One Vision, had no effect on reducing homicide rates in the areas where it was implemented. The study also found that introduction of the program into the community had a negative effect, with increases in aggravated assault and gun assaults being recorded by law enforcement. The study also compared the success of the One Vision program to similar programs in Chicago and Baltimore, and found that the programs in the other two cities were more successful at reducing violent crime rates than the program in Pittsburgh. The poor success of the Pittsburgh program was attributed to several factors: poor administration of the program, targeting of the wrong type of offenders by those working on the streets, and difficulty on the part of street workers to manage their excessive workload. This study examined the community-driven violence reduction program, One Vision that was instituted in Pittsburgh, PA. Data for the study were obtained from the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police and included incident-level information for homicides, aggravated assaults, and gun assaults occurring between January 1, 1997, and December 31, 2007. Rates of homicides, aggravated assaults, and gun assaults were compared from before implementation of the program and after implementation. Results of the study indicate that the One Vision program was not effective at reducing violent crime levels in Pittsburgh, and that several factors were involved in decreasing the effectiveness of the program. Policy implications are discussed. Tables, figures, and references